It sure seems like it.
You’re asserting false positives, dejecting actual evidence of when things happen, and then trying to blame me in the aftermath.
My pointing out the contradiction in your claim and conduct doesn’t ‘make excuses for them’, that’s a bad reading on your part because you’re just looking for something to blame.
Breaking rules to try to highlight a specific violator does not get them in trouble; some flagrant abusers get several forms of exposure which then leads to enough actual reports to get action taken… and then they just make another account and aren’t troubled by it much the same way that your ban didn’t stop you.
So the is a direct issue with how you are processing it: how you’re faulting me, and then asserting that it’s the other people that are ‘stupid’ when they point out you’re drawing the wrong conclusion from what little data you actual process in this. This is especially more so to the point as you seem only capable of processing two outcomes out of this: people ‘defending’ the company, and people being like you. Ignorant people cast things as only two options, reject anything that doesn’t agree with them, and refuse to learn.
It’s not two polarized actions in this, and your resorting to the assumption – at the rejection of what people actually post – is why I continue to say that you are effectively illiterate.
Pointing out incorrect assumptions and bad actions to try to rationalize incorrect behaviors isn’t an ‘excuse’ for blizzard, it’s a standard grievance that effects every day life. It’s much the same mindset that gets anti-social people to justify their ruining games – the thing you’re against – or how people rationalize trying to drive highway strategies in residential areas.
Civil Disobedience had a function in showing errors with governing laws; bad imitations of it do not get the traction people think it does online, but they’re too busy patting themselves on the back to bother to notice.
There have been outright blues that said people over report the wrong things, and don’t report the correct things. They convince themselves the system doesn’t work, then they don’t use it, and are then upset that it’s not working.
Circular reasoning with bad-faith arguments is about as “under a rock” as a it gets for people that brag about their intellectual accomplishments, but then don’t ever show anything substantial to support those efforts. People that have a hard time understanding valid evidence tend to also draw erroneous conclusions.
Case and example?
Your conduct.